Kierkegaard's "Concluding Unscientific Postscript"

[devonin]

In the "Concluding Unsicentific Postscript" Kirkegaard, writing through a pseudonym Johannes Climacus, argues for the concept that "Subjectivity is Truth"

In the Concluding Unscientific Postscript, Climacus makes the claim that subjectivity is Truth. In order to substantiate this claim, he takes a number of steps to establish his point. Firstly, Climacus sets out the claim, which is central to his overarching argument, that the truth of a given thought is directly proportional to the inwardness of that thought. Climacus states that “At its maximum this inward ‘how’ is the passion of the infinite, and the passion of the infinite is the truth”

By ‘passion of the infinite” Climacus here refers to a sort of internal infinity rather than the traditional mathematical one. When Climacus calls for the passion of the infinite, what he’s looking for is acceptance of the fact that this inward reflection is the task of an entire lifetime, not one that can be completed, and moved on from.

Climacus then goes on to point out that, for him, the passion of the infinite -is- subjectivity, and so logic dictates that subjectivity itself is the truth. Climacus wants to say that since the passion of the infinite is the truth, and that therefore, any thinking would involve infinite decisiveness and inward reflection, that objectivity -must- be not-truth, because “Objectively, there is no infinite decisiveness” and that only in subjectivity is there decisiveness.

Objective thought is concerned with the attaining of an objective final truth, a contentive conclusion that is reachable. In subjective reflection with the passion of the infinite is where the decisive factor is; the content of objective thought is the conclusion, while the content of subjective thought, “is precisely itself. In this manner subjectivity and the subjective ‘how’ constitute the truth.” Here, Climacus means that objective reflection is based upon reaching a final end-point from which you can move forward, while the ‘true’ manner of thought is that the emphasis is on the becoming, on the process of appropriation, internalizing the decisiveness of the subjective reflection.

For Climacus, having now set down his process for determining the sort of thing truth is provides a straightforward definition: “An objective uncertainty held fast in an appropriation-process of the most passionate inwardness is the truth.” What Climacus means by this is what was mentioned above, that the content of subjective reflection is precisely itself. Only through the embracing of that objective uncertainty, that “My existence is uncertain” and embracing it with all the infinite passion of subjective inward thought can the truth ever be reached. Only through this appropriation process of turning thinking into doing, of allowing the objective uncertainty of existence to interpenetrate the whole of the thinker’s being can there be Truth.

The big contrasts in the Postscript are between the subjective and the objective:

Objective truth is that which relates to propositions, that which has no relation to the existence of the knower. History, science, and speculative philosophy all deal with objective knowledge. According to Climacus, all objective knowledge is subject to doubt.

Subjective truth is essential or ethico-religious truth. It is not comprised of propositions or perceptions of the external world, but of introspection, experiences, and especially one's relationship with God

What do you think of Kirkegaard's ideas on the subjectivity of truth? He's often seen as a counter to Hegel's more deterministic belief that "The Rational is Real" meaning that all reality is capable of being expressed in rational categories, and has objective truth and meaning.

[Kilroy_x]

Re: Kierkegaard's "Concluding Unscientific Postscript"

That seems like a very Ad Hoc way of understanding "truth", in the sense that it apparently asks each individual to consider their own being the only method for substantiation of truth, relative to their own being. It certainly gives a new meaning to "identity". So I suppose if you take it at face value, yes, it contradicts with any form of monism. Honestly though I'm not even sure how to interpret this, let alone respond to it.

[devonin]

Re: Kierkegaard's "Concluding Unscientific Postscript"

It really gets into the whole "Human Being/Human Becoming" paradigm that guys like Nietzsche and Heidegger were always on about. I find Kierkegaard to be interesting, but in this case he falls victim to the sort of issue like:
"Imagine if the only truth were mankind's constant personal effort to find truth"
"Okay...what would that imply?"
"I dunno"

It's an interesting concept but it doesn't seem to me at least, to especially correspond to an actual belief system you can use practically in the world. At best it's a somewhat more spiritual concept of the will to power, and Nietzsche phrases it all better anyway.